Thank you for visiting our forum. As a guest, you have limited access to view some discussion and articles. By joining our free community, you will be able to view all discussions and articles, post your own topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos, participate in Pick'Em contests and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today!!

Scrapping the 3-4 at this point may be worse than continuing to play with it. They spent two camps trying to install it with a bunch of guys who never played the 4-3 system the staff used before. If they were going to scrap something it would probably be better served to scrap the 10 yard cushion they give receivers on every play.

What I was really agreeing with was more of the fact of not playing a 10-12 yard cushion on the receivers. I guess that's inexperience not wanting to get beat over the top. Nobody said that with the 3-4 you had to play a soft zone like we did all night. I could have gone out there and thrown 8 yard passes down the field all night. We've got to trust who we have on the field in the secondary and let them play. TAM never even went down field, simply because we gave them underneath ALL NIGHT.

What I was really agreeing with was more of the fact of not playing a 10-12 yard cushion on the receivers. I guess that's inexperience not wanting to get beat over the top. Nobody said that with the 3-4 you had to play a soft zone like we did all night. I could have gone out there and thrown 8 yard passes down the field all night. We've got to trust who we have on the field in the secondary and let them play. TAM never even went down field, simply because we gave them underneath ALL NIGHT.

I think we started playing with a cushion, after RSJ got open deep twice on the first 2 drives for A&M.

I agree with a lot of the posters about personnel for the 3-4. It relies on a NT that can eat up space and occupy 2 OL. It also relies on a couple or at least one stud OLB. I think of one of the better 3-4 defenses of all time and it was the NY Giants in the mid to late 80's. Three beefy D-lineman with a great NT and then the best OLB ever to play the game in LT. Not saying the 3-4 cannot work, but do we have that kind of personnel? I don't think we do at this time. I was at the LSU/Wisconsin game and the 4-3 just looks better. It fits my eye and before the ball is snapped, just looks like it will work. That and LSU DB's are very aggressive and jam those receivers. Tanner McEvoy could not do squat.... I digress....

I also get a little perplexed by Spurrier. Love the guy and he is an offensive genius, but this notion that he stays away from the defense scheming and coaching bothers me. He knows what A&M runs on offense and he knows what we run on offense. Does he not look at his own defensive scheme, the large cushion by the DB's, the lack of pass rush, and not think to himself, "man I can pick this apart and I bet Sumlin can too..." ???? To be critical of the 3-4 after we get torched is a little late. He should have known - as an offensive coach - that our D could and will get shredded.....well, it did.

I agree with a lot of the posters about personnel for the 3-4. It relies on a NT that can eat up space and occupy 2 OL

I also get a little perplexed by Spurrier. Love the guy and he is an offensive genius, but this notion that he stays away from the defense scheming and coaching bothers me. He knows what A&M runs on offense and he knows what we run on offense. Does he not look at his own defensive scheme, the large cushion by the DB's, the lack of pass rush, and not think to himself, "man I can pick this apart and I bet Sumlin can too..." ???? To be critical of the 3-4 after we get torched is a little late. He should have known - as an offensive coach - that our D could and will get shredded.....well, it did.

Occupy 2 OL? We haven't had that since Roy Hart.

Early in the TAMU game Spurrier told Whammy to can the 3-4 and rotate players in the 4 man front.

Others here know more than me, but it seems that we abandoned fundamentals in this game so much to the point where you really can't evaluate the 3-4 defense or any other scheme properly.

Take a look at Alabama. I thought the Mountaineers were going to give them the same waxing the Aggies gave us, but the Tide found the answer and held WVU in check. Sumlin-style offenses are here to stay this season.

There's an argument for staying with the 3-4 and making it work, even if it means risking a loss to ECU. The same goes for embracing Sumlin's offensive strategy enough to have it as a contingency in our other games if needed.

If you look past the emotional side of the loss, the grain of salt is that the defense that showed up for the Aggies game couldn't have executed a game of checkers properly because of a lack of fundamentals.

Maybe HBC needs to correct the fundamentals issues and give the 3-4 another shot in the ECU game. You know we'll see the Aggies once more in the championship game when we get the problems fixed and live up to predictions.

Others here know more than me, but it seems that we abandoned fundamentals in this game so much to the point where you really can't evaluate the 3-4 defense or any other scheme properly.

Take a look at Alabama. I thought the Mountaineers were going to give them the same waxing the Aggies gave us, but the Tide found the answer and held WVU in check. Sumlin-style offenses are here to stay this season.

There's an argument for staying with the 3-4 and making it work, even if it means risking a loss to ECU. The same goes for embracing Sumlin's offensive strategy enough to have it as a contingency in our other games if needed.

If you look past the emotional side of the loss, the grain of salt is that the defense that showed up for the Aggies game couldn't have executed a game of checkers properly because of a lack of fundamentals.

Maybe HBC needs to correct the fundamentals issues and give the 3-4 another shot in the ECU game. You know we'll see the Aggies once more in the championship game when we get the problems fixed and live up to predictions.

Of course Bama didn't stop establishing the run either. WV played Bama well but got worn down as the game progressed.

it's not just the scheme (which we don't have the proper players to play), it's making the players have to think instead of react, and they were way to slow to the ball. We need to simplify just like we did when Ellis Johnson was here and we were having problems with our DB's.